| Subject: Keepin' it real |
Author:
Ben
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 09/24/06 1:52pm
In reply to:
Wade A. Tisthammer
's message, "An explanation" on 09/21/06 6:02pm
>>Once I did that, you went back and argued against the
>>site that you before didn't think was worth the time.
>>What changed?
>
>When you said "I can see you can't get past the white
>supremacy thing and look at some of the points the
>author makes..." I took that as a challenge (and to be
>honest, almost as an insult--although I know that it
>probably wasn't intended to be), to which I then
>responded.
I see. It wasn't really intended to be an insult... just my way of expressing frustration with your lack of desire to discuss the points made by the author. Sorry if it came across that way (I can see how it did).
>>You chose instead to focus on what you perceived as my
>>inadequacy...
>>
>>"Just wondering, when the top of the web page had (in
>>great big letters) "MARCH OF THE TITANS - A HISTORY OF
>>THE WHITE RACE" didn't that tip you off as a bit
>>suspicious regarding the issue of white supremacy?"
>
>Well, I did think this was a legitimate
>question. The title immediately made me suspicious,
>though I confess I am a bit cynical. When you replied
>to my question, "No... should it?" To which I replied
>with a follow-up question (noting that the title
>likened the white race to a race of powerful deities),
>"How did you interpret the title?" These questions
>were not meant as insults; I was really curious as to
>what your thoughts were when you read the title.
Well, I first didn't read the title. I guess I'm guilty of skimming a lot before really deciding if something is worth my time. And I think I often really do ignore the actual title, which is strange. Maybe I missed that day in reading class. :) But you notice before anyone else responded to my original post, I figured out that it was a white supremacy site and said so. But I figured with the tumbleweeds blowing across the message board lately, it couldn't hurt to have something a little controversial up.
>>In reality, I really didn't notice the title.
>
>Ah, so that's why it didn't tip you off as
>suspicious, because you didn't notice the great big
>words at the top of the page (as opposed to e.g.
>interpreting the title differently).
Well, actually, my response "No.. should it?" was also genuine. I figured out it was a white supremacy site by reading it more thoroughly, and still not from the title. I wasn't aware that "Titans" was something used by white supremacists. I know I probably should be, but I wasn't (now I am).
>Well, here's the thing I didn't get (and still don't).
> You apparently assumed that this white
>supremacist guy was "pro-Christianity" and then became
>bemused as to why this author would argue that the
>religion is false. The "two and two" conclusion would
>seem to be that this author (and anyone else who
>attacks the veracity of Christianity in such a manner)
>is probably not "pro-Christianity" and that your
>initial assumption was simply false.
Maybe... I said, "Aren't they pro-Christianity, or at least their version? Why would they want to promote the idea that Christianity evolved from other religions?" I realize that their own version of Christianity may be skewed, but I did think white supremacists considered themselves Christians. Don't they? Keep in mind, I realize that one group considering itself Christian does not mean that other Christians agree.
> Seriously, was
>there anything in the page that gave you the idea that
>this guy was "pro-Christianity"? Why did you hold on
>to this assumption after his attack? Is there
>something I missed?
No, nothing you missed... just my preconceived notion that white supremacists consider themselves Christian, I guess. I'm still wondering if that's inaccurate. Let me know if you find something that indicates otherwise. If they aren't Christian, how do they align themselves as far as religion? I see them as basically redneck, rebel-flag waving, Bible-believing Southerners. Maybe I'm wrong.
[after a couple of Google searches...]
Here's an excerpt from the Wikipedia on this issue: "In the United States, some claim white supremacist movements are linked to fundamentalist Christianity but most Christians denounce the movement as fundamentally non-Christian. The Christian Identity movement, which tends to regard other branches of Christianity as heretical, is closely tied to White Supremacism." [full link]
This is basically what I was thinking... they consider themselves to be some form of fundamentalist Christian. Which is why it's strange to me that they might be anti-Christian in their representation of history.
Ben
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 